 "Verdict by larger benches to sort out mercy plea issue: CJI")
Chief Justice of India P Sathasivam has said an authoritative pronouncement by a larger Constitution bench would be made to settle divergent views on commutation of death penalty on the grounds of delay in deciding mercy pleas.
"That question is subjudice, it is still pending in the Supreme Court. Wait for some more time there's going to be an authoritative pronouncement, means, larger bench will decide," Justice Sathasivam, who took over as 40th CJI last week, said yesterday.
Justice Sathasivam was responding to a query by reporters on the apex court verdict on mercy petitions.
"First, I am thinking of constituting one Constitution bench consisting of five judges for at least one month--which means the total working days the bench will hear matters.
"For cases regarding delay in disposal of mercy pleas, in order to avoid conflicting views by separate two or three judge benches, I am thinking of listing those cases before a Constitution bench of five judges for authoritative pronouncements," he had said.
Asked to comment yesterday on the Supreme Court having only two women judges, Justice Sathasivam said, "we are going to identify more women judges not only in Supreme Court but also in all High Courts.
The CJI has also defended the Collegium system for appointment of judges to higher judiciary.
"It's not the collegium of judges alone. The Chief Justices of High Courts and the Supreme Court also they consult various authorities, not only the collegium judges, other respected senior members, and both the state and central govt they offer their views it's not a one man's decision or a group of person's decision," he said when asked whether the collegium system should be done away with as it is thought to be opaque.
Justice Sathasivam, in an interview to PTI, had said that there was no need for changing the present collegium system of appointing judges to the higher judiciary nor the impeachment provisions in the Constitution.
However, judiciary is open to any good suggestions or measures to improve the present system of appointment, he had said, dismissing criticism that it is not transparent and that the government has no role in it.
"That question is subjudice, it is still pending in the Supreme Court. Wait for some more time there's going to be an authoritative pronouncement, means, larger bench will decide," Justice Sathasivam, who took over as 40th CJI last week, said yesterday.
Justice Sathasivam was responding to a query by reporters on the apex court verdict on mercy petitions.
More From This Section
Before taking over as the CJI, he had told PTI that in view of conflicting opinions of smaller two or three judges benches on such issues, a larger bench would be formed which would hear such matters, at least, for a month for delivering "authoritative pronouncements".
"First, I am thinking of constituting one Constitution bench consisting of five judges for at least one month--which means the total working days the bench will hear matters.
"For cases regarding delay in disposal of mercy pleas, in order to avoid conflicting views by separate two or three judge benches, I am thinking of listing those cases before a Constitution bench of five judges for authoritative pronouncements," he had said.
Asked to comment yesterday on the Supreme Court having only two women judges, Justice Sathasivam said, "we are going to identify more women judges not only in Supreme Court but also in all High Courts.
The CJI has also defended the Collegium system for appointment of judges to higher judiciary.
"It's not the collegium of judges alone. The Chief Justices of High Courts and the Supreme Court also they consult various authorities, not only the collegium judges, other respected senior members, and both the state and central govt they offer their views it's not a one man's decision or a group of person's decision," he said when asked whether the collegium system should be done away with as it is thought to be opaque.
Justice Sathasivam, in an interview to PTI, had said that there was no need for changing the present collegium system of appointing judges to the higher judiciary nor the impeachment provisions in the Constitution.
However, judiciary is open to any good suggestions or measures to improve the present system of appointment, he had said, dismissing criticism that it is not transparent and that the government has no role in it.